Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:24:30.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Socialist patrimonialism and the global economy: the case of Romania

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Ronald H. Linden
Ronald H. Linden
Affiliation:
Assistant Professor of Political Science and Director of the Center for Russian and East European Studies at the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Get access

Abstract

The evolution in Romania of a governing system of socialist patrimonialism, as opposed to one of collective rule by counterbalancing elites, accounts for both the country's early and extensive contact with the international capitalist economy and its belated but sharp reaction to international economic disruptions. In the absence of powerful alternative political elites or policies, the socialist nationalist ideology of Nicolae Ceausescu defined the country's “multilateral development” and its deviant foreign policy. Ceausescu's manipulation of the system strengthened his hold during the time of rapid economic development and undermined the country's capacity to react promptly or moderately to economic shocks. Events in Poland, especially the rise of Solidarity, complicated Romanian adjustment; but on balance, the adjustment to external economic forces reinforced rather than eroded Ceausescu's socialist patrimonialism.

Type
3. Economic Strategy inside the CMEA
Information
International Organization , Volume 40 , Issue 2 , Spring 1986 , pp. 347 - 380
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Weber, Max, Economy and Society (New York: Bedminster, 1968), pp. 1006–69Google Scholar.

2. Schwartzman, Simon, “Back to Weber: Corporatism and Patrimonialism in the Seventies,” in Malloy, James M., ed., Authoritarianism and Corporatism in Latin America (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1977), pp. 89–106Google Scholar; quote is from p. 98.

3. For a discussion of the Gheorghiu-Dej period, including its characterization as patrimonial, see Jowitt, Kenneth, Revolutionary Breakthroughs and National Development: The Case of Romania, 1944–1965 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1971), especially pp. 191–96Google Scholar.

4. See Fischer, Mary Ellen, “Political Leadership and Personnel Policy in Romania,” in Rosefielde, Steven, World Communism at the Crossroads (Boston: Martinus Nijhoff, 1980), pp. 222–27Google Scholar. For a discussion of the network of Romanian local government, see Nelson, Daniel, Democratic Centralism in Romania: A Study of Local Communist Politics (Boulder: East European Monographs, 1980; distributed by Columbia University Press, New York), pp. 26–50Google Scholar.

5. See Tsantis, Andreas and Pepper, Roy, Romania: The Industrialization of an Agrarian Economy under Socialist Planning (Washington: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, 1979), p. 40Google Scholar; hereafter cited as World Bank, Romania.

6. On the evolution of the Bureau, see Fischer, , “Political Leadership,” pp. 221–22Google Scholar. Members of Ceausescu's family in important positions include: Elena (wife), member of RCP Political Executive Committee and Permanent Bureau, chairman of Commission on Cadres, first deputy prime minister, chairman of National Council on Science and Technology; Nicu (son), first secretary of Union of Communist Youth and (automatically) minister of youth, member of executive bureau of National Council of Socialist Democracy and Unity Front, member of National Council of Working People; Ilie (brother), lieutenant general, deputy minister of defense and head of Higher Political Council of Romanian army; Nicolae (brother), lieutenant general, position in Ministry of Interior; loan (brother), vice-chairman of State Planning Commission and vice-chairman of Council on Forestry; Manea Manescu (brother-in-law), member of Political Executive Committee, vice-chairman of State Council and of Supreme Council for Economic and Social Development, prime minister from 1974 to 1979; Gheorge Petrescu (brother-in-law), deputy prime minister, chairman of section for transportation and communication of Supreme Council for Economic and Social Development. See Radio Free Europe Research, 5 February 1980, 7 June 1983, and 20 January 1984; hereafter cited as RFER. See also New York Times, 27 November 1979, p. 2.

7. Fischer, Mary Ellen, “Idol or Leader? The Origins and Future of the Ceausescu Cult,” in Nelson, Daniel, ed., Romania in the 1980s (Boulder: Westview, 1981), p. 118Google Scholar.

8. Fischer, discusses the reforms in “Participatory Reforms,” pp. 217–30Google Scholar; see also Jowitt, Kenneth, “Political Innovation in Rumania,” Survey 20 (Autumn 1974), pp. 132–51Google Scholar.

9. See Nelson, , Democratic Centralism, pp. 51ff.Google Scholar; Jowitt, , “Political Innovation,” pp. 138–39Google Scholar; Smith, Alan H., “Romanian Economic Reforms,” in NATO, Economic and Information Directorates, Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Prospects for the 1980s (Elmsford, N.Y.: Pergamon, 1981), pp. 37–38Google Scholar.

10. See Triska, Jan and Johnson, Paul, Political Development and Political Change in Eastern Europe: A Comparative Study (Denver: University of Denver, Monograph Series in World Affairs, 1975), pp. 11–16Google Scholar.

11. See Garmarinikow, Michael, “Balance Sheet on Economic Reforms,” in Joint Economic Committee, Reorientation and Commercial Relations of the Economies of Eastern Europe, 93d Cong., 2d sess., 1974, p. 208Google Scholar.

12. Nelson, Daniel, “Workers in a Workers' State,” in Nelson, , ed., Romania in the 1980s (Boulder: Westview, 1981), p. 177Google Scholar.

13. See World Bank, Romania, pp. 34–73Google Scholar.

14. Alton, Thad P., “Comparative Structure and Growth of Economic Activity in Eastern Europe,” in Joint Economic Committee, East European Economies Post-Helsinki, 95th Cong., 1st sess., 1977, p. 239Google Scholar. Calculated as GNP, the respective rates are 6.2%, 9.4%, and 8.6%; see Alton, Thad P. et al. , “Economic Growth in Eastern Europe 1965, 1970, and 1975–1980,” Research Project on National Income in East Central Europe, Occasional Papers (New York: L. W. International Financial Research, 1981), p. 25Google Scholar. For a discussion of the uncertainties of Romanian national statistics, see Marer, Paul A., Evaluation of the National Accounts, Prices, Exchange Rates and Growth Rates of the USSR, Eastern Europe and Cuba, with Alternative Estimates of Their Dollar GNPs (Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1985), pp. 109–110, 115–19, 127–30, 140Google Scholar.

15. World Bank, Romania, p. 139Google Scholar.

16. Jackson, Marvin R., “Industrialization, Trade, and Mobilization in Romania's Drive for Economic Independence,” in Joint Economic Committee, East European Economies Post-Helsinki, 95th Cong., 1st sess., 1977, p. 914Google Scholar.

17. Zoeter, Joan Parpart, “Eastern Europe: The Hard Currency Debt,” in Joint Economic Committee, East European Economic Assessment, pt. 2, Regional Assessments, 97th Cong., 1st sess., 1981, pp. 729, 730Google Scholar.

18. See Marer, Paul, “Economic Performance, Strategy, and Prospects in Eastern Europe,” in Joint Economic Committee, East European Economies Post-Helsinki, 95th Cong., 1st sess., 1977, pp. 542, 543Google Scholar.

19. Central Intelligence Agency, Energy Supplies in Eastern Europe: A Statistical Compilation (Washington, D.C.: National Technical Information Service, 1979), pp. 11, 14 (comparison excludes the Soviet Union)Google Scholar. However, also during this period coal production fell below consumption for the first time since 1960. Ibid., p. 68.

20. See Montias, John M., “Romania's Foreign Trade: An Overview,” in Joint Economic Committee, East European Economies Post-Helsinki, 95th Cong., 1st sess., 1977, pp. 865–85Google Scholar.

21. Jackson, Marvin R., “Perspectives on Romania's Economic Development in the 1980s,” in Nelson, Daniel, ed., Romania in the 1980s (Boulder: Westview, 1981), p. 271Google Scholar.

22. Edwin M. Snell estimates the Romanian standard of living in 1975 to be at 40–50% that of East Germany. See “East European Economies between the Soviets and the Capitalists,” in Joint Economic Committee, East European Economies Post-Helsinki, 95th Cong., 1st sess., 1977, p. 27Google Scholar.

23. See Jowitt, , Revolutionary Breakthroughs, Montias, John M., Economic Development in Communist Rumania (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1967)Google Scholar; and Linden, Ronald H., Bear and Foxes: The International Relations of the East European States (Boulder: East European Quarterly, 1979; distributed by Columbia University Press, New York), pp. 177–203Google Scholar.

24. See the letter to the Central Committee by Karoly Kiraly, former alternate member of the RCP Presidium and member of the Central Committee, in the New York Times, 1 02 1978, p. 23Google Scholar. See also Lucbert, Manuel, “La minorité hongroise de Transylvanie est nécontente de son sort,” Le Monde, 5 05 1978, p. 4Google Scholar; Lendvai, Paul, “Achilles heel of Romanian nationalism,” Financial Times, 31 01 1978Google Scholar.

25. See Nicolae Ceausescu, “Raportul Comitetului Central cu Privire la Activitatea Partidului Comunist Român în Perioada dintre Congresul al X-lea si Congresul al Xl-lea si Sarcinile de viitor ale Partidului,” in Congresul al Xl-lea Partidului Comunist Român (Bucharest: Editura Politicâ, 1975), p. 56Google Scholar.

26. Alton, et al. , “Economic Growth in Eastern Europe,” p. 25Google Scholar; for detailed data on agricultural production see Alton, Thad et al. , “Agricultural Output, Expenses and Depreciation, Gross Product and Net Product in Eastern Europe 1965, 1970, and 1975–1980,” Research Project on National Income in East Central Europe, Occasional Papers (New York: L. W. International Financial Research, 1981)Google Scholar.

27. România Liberǎ, 12 February 1982, p. 1, and Agerpress, 6 October 1980 [Foreign Broadcast Information Service, 17 October 1980, p. H4]; hereafter cited as FBIS.

28. de Statisticǎ, Directia Centralǎ, Anuarul Statistic al Republicii Socialiste România, 1980 (Bucharest: Directia Centralǎ de Statisticǎ, 1981), p. 179Google Scholar, and U.S. Embassy, “Romania: Key Economic Indicators” (Mimeo, Bucharest, 1982)Google Scholar.

29. In 1981 Romanian export of oil products earned $2.2 billion and represented 17% of the country's exports (in dollar value); see Wharton Econometric Forecasting Associates (hereafter cited as Wharton), “Romanian Foreign Trade and Balance of Payments during January-June 1982 and Outlook for the Rest of 1982,” Centrally Planned Economies: Current Analysis, no. 89, 8 11 1982, p. 4Google Scholar.

30. Wharton, , Centrally Planned Economies Foreign Trade Databank (Washington, D.C.: Wharton, 1982)Google Scholar; hereafter cited as Wharton Foreign Trade Databank.

31. Economist, 24 April 1982; Financial Times, 8 December 1982, p. 14; a second agreement was also reached covering 1983 obligations. See Financial Times, 7 February 1983.

32. “Statement on the Stand of the Rumanian Workers’ Party Concerning the Problems of the International Communist and Working Class Movement” (April 1964), text in Griffith, William E., Sino-Soviet Relations: 1964–65 (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1970), pp. 269–96, quote is from p. 282Google Scholar. See the discussion in Montias, , Economic Development, pp. 187–230Google Scholar.

33. See Linden, , Bear and Foxes, pp. 10–52, 177–203Google Scholar.

34. Trade statistics for these periods can be found in Marer, Paul, Soviet and East European Foreign Trade, 1946–1979 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1972), pp. 30, 40Google Scholar; Montias, , ”Romania's Foreign Trade”; Directia Centralǎ de Statisticǎ, Anuarul Statistic al Republicii Socialiste România, 19— (Bucharest: Directia Centralǎ de Statisticǎ, annual)Google Scholar; and Statisticǎ, Directia Centralǎ de, Comerful Exterior al Republicii Socialist Roman, 1973 (Bucharest: Directia Centralǎ de Statisticǎ, n.d.)Google Scholar.

35. Fallenbuchl, Zbigniew, “East European Integration: COMECON,” in Joint Economic Committee, Reorientation and Commercial Relations of the Economies of Eastern Europe, 93d Cong., 2d sess., 1974, p. 105Google Scholar.

36. See Ceausescu's speeches of 29 November 1968 and 7 February 1969, both in Romania on the Way of Completing Socialist Construction, vol. 3 (Bucharest: Meridane, 1969), pp. 682–83, and 826Google Scholar. See also Ecobescu, Nicolai and Sergiu Celac, Politico externa a României Socialiste (Bucharest: Editura Politicǎ, 1975)Google Scholar.

37. See Ceausescu, , “Raportul,” pp. 41–42Google Scholar; see also Jowitt, , Revolutionary Breakthroughs, pp. 233–72Google Scholar.

38. For the Romanian attitude toward Czechoslovakia and other WTO-coordinated positions, see Linden, , Bear and Foxes, pp. 53ffGoogle Scholar. For a list of WTO maneuvers, see Jones, Christopher D., Soviet Influence in Eastern Europe (New York: Praeger, 1981), pp. 301–8Google Scholar. Romanian defense expenditures as a percentage of GNP were the lowest in Eastern Europe for 1970–73; see Alton, Thad P. et al. , “Military Expenditures in Eastern Europe: Some Alternative Estimates,” in Joint Economic Committee, Reorientation and Commercial Relations of the Economies of Eastern Europe, 93d Cong., 2d sess., 1974, pp. 502–3Google Scholar.

39. See Ceausescu's speech to the 1972 National Party Conference, in Romania on the Way of Building up the Multilaterally Developed Socialist Society, vol. 7 (Bucharest: Meridane, 1973), pp. 519–20Google Scholar.

40. Data in Montias, , “Romania's Foreign Trade,” pp. 872, 882–85Google Scholar.

41. Data from Jackson, Marvin R., “Romania's Economy at the End of the 1970s: Turning the Comer on Intensive Development,” in Joint Economic Committee, East European Economic Assessment, pt. 1, Country Studies, 1980, 97th Cong., 1st sess., 1981, p. 272Google Scholar; years compared are 1970 and 1975.

42. Figure for Romania is from Jackson, , “Industrialization, Trade and Mobilization,” p. 922Google Scholar; for the other states (figures are 1975) see CIA, Energy Supplies, p. 11Google Scholar. Excluding Poland, the figure for the other East European states is 50%.

43. Marer, , “Economic Performance, Strategy and Prospects,” pp. 540–44Google Scholar; Jackson, , “Romania's Economy,” p. 287Google Scholar.

44. See data in Jackson, , “Perspectives on Romania's Economic Development,” pp. 256–57Google Scholar.

45. New York Times, 27 November 1977, pp. 1, 3; RFER, 12 August 1977, 26 October 1977.

46. Smith, , “Romanian Economic Reforms,” pp. 48–52Google Scholar.

47. Ibid., p. 51; see also the discussion in Nelson, , “Workers in a Workers’ State,” pp. 174–91Google Scholar.

48. See Fischer, Mary Ellen, “Nicolae Ceausescu and the Romanian Political Leadership: Nationalization and Personalization of Power,” Moseley, Edwin M. Faculty Research Lecture, Skidmore College, 1982, p. 34Google Scholar.

49. România Liberǎ, 30 October 1981, p. 2; Scînteia, 3 December 1981, pp. 1, 2.

50. See, for example, Ceausescu's speech at the Congress of Working People's Councils, Scînteia, 13 09 1980, pp. 1–2Google Scholar.

51. See, for example, Ceausescu's speech at Brasov, in România pe Drumul Construirii Societǎtii Socialiste Multilateral Dezvoltate, vol. 21 (Bucharest: Editura Politicǎ, 1981), pp. 307–27Google Scholar.

52. See Scînteia, 17 October 1980, p. 2; Bucharest Domestic Service, 26 October 1980; Scinteia, 18 December 1980, pp. 1, 3. See also the Twelfth Congress speeches of Ilie Verdet (prime minister), Cornel Burtica (minister of foreign trade), and Paul Niculescu (minister of finance), all of whom subsequently lost their jobs, in Scînteia, 21–23 November 1979.

53. Scînteia, 1 November 1980, p. 3; 19 December 1980, p. 7, and România Liberǎ, 17 December 1981, pp. 1, 2.

54. România Liberǎ, 15 February 1982, pp. 1–3.

55. Scînteia, 9 February 1982, p. 1.

56. RFER, 19 March 1979; see also Gilberg, Trond, “Modernization, Human Rights and Nationalism: The Case of Romania,” in Klein, George and Reban, Milan, eds., The Politics of Ethnicity in Eastern Europe (Boulder: East European Quarterly, 1981; distributed by Columbia University Press, New York), pp. 204–6Google Scholar.

57. In 1980 Karoly Kiraly published a second letter updating the regime's policy toward the Hungarian minority; see RFER, 22 July 1980.

58. For all figures, compare the Twelfth Party Congress directives given in Congresul al XII-lea Partidul Comunist Român (Bucharest: Editura Politicǎ, 1981), pp. 690–91Google Scholar, with the plan as finally adopted (România Liberǎ, 2 July 1981, pp. 1–4. The congress directives did not specify an agricultural share of overall investment, but Ceausescu's report indicated that of 1300–1350 billion lei to be invested, approximately 155 billion lei (or 11.7%) would be devoted to agriculture (Congresul al XII-lea, pp. 36–40). The plan as adopted put the agricultural share at 12.9% (România Liberǎ, 2 July 1981, p. 3). The Twelfth Congress adopted several special programs on development to 1990, including one on energy (Congresul al XII-lea, pp. 767–86).

59. See Scînteia, 25 and 26 November 1978, and Ceausescu's speeches of 27 and 29 November 1978 [Agerpress, same dates]. On the arms race, see Ceausescu's message to both Soviet President Brezhnev and U.S. President Reagan urging the elimination of medium-range missiles from Europe, , in Scînteia, 4 12 1981, p. 1Google Scholar, and the reports of a huge peace and disarmament rally in Bucharest, , Scînteia, 6 12 1981, pp. 1–4Google Scholar.

60. Wharton Foreign Trade Data Bank, and Wharton, , “Romanian External Financial Situation at the End of 1981,” Centrally Planned Economies: Current Analysis, 1 03 1982, p. 5Google Scholar.

61. Wharton, , “Romania's Economy at Mid-1982 and Outlook for the Rest of 1982,” Centrally Planned Economies: Current Analysis, no. 90, 11 1982, p. 3Google Scholar, and Anuarul Statistic, 1980, p. 523.

62. See Prime Minister Ilie Verdet's speech at the thirty-fifth session of the CMEA Council, România Liberǎ, 7 07 1981, p. 5Google Scholar; see also Agerpress, 30 July 1981 [FBIS, 31 July 1981, pp. AA1–2].

63. Wharton, , “Romanian Foreign Trade,” p. 5Google Scholar; RFER, 28 September 1984.

64. See Scînteia, 8 July 1981 [FBIS, 13 July 1981, p. H3] and 23 September 1981 [FBIS, 24 September 1981, p. H8]. The Romanians also began promoting the idea of an international agreement to establish ceilings on interest rates, with developing countries receiving preferential rates; see Agerpress, 19 May 1982.

65. Financial Times, 8 December 1982, p. 14; Wall Street Journal, 4 January 1983, p. 33; Financial Times, 7 February 1983.

66. Financial Times, 24 June 1982; East European Markets, 25 January 1982, p. 2, and 31 May 1982, p. 8.

67. Kanet, Roger, “Patterns of Eastern European Economic Involvement in the Third World,” in Radu, Michael, ed., Eastern Europe and the Third World (New York: Praeger, 1981), pp. 312–14, 330Google Scholar.

68. Barac, Ion, “Romania and the Developing Countries,” Revue roumanie d'études internationales 11, no. 1 (1977), p. 72Google Scholar. See also Ion Mielcioiu, “The Colombo Conference of the Heads of State of the Non-Aligned Countries, Romania's Participation,” ibid., pp. 73–88.

69. Scînteia, 25 and 26 November 1978; Agerpress, 27 and 29 November 1978.

70. Reisinger, William M., “East European Military Expenditures in the 1970s: Collective Good or Bargaining Offer,” International Organization 37 (Winter 1983), p. 147Google Scholar; Alexiev, Alex, Romania and the Warsaw Pact: The Defense Policy of a Reluctant Ally, Rand Paper Series, No. P-6270 (Santa Monica: Rand, 1979), pp. 10–12Google Scholar.

71. Marer, Paul and Montias, John Michael, “CMEA Integration: Theory and Practice,” in Joint Economic Committee, East European Economic Assessment, pt. 2, Regional Assessments, 97th Cong., 1st sess., 1981, p. 152Google Scholar.

72. The IMF conditions reportedly involved adjustments of prices and interest rates, reduction of investment, and the release of more complete information, Financial Times, 23 and 24 June 1982; Romania also borrowed $32.5 million from the World Bank in fiscal 1981–82, East European Markets, 31 May 1982, p. 8.

73. For the Romanian statement at Berlin, see Agerpress, 29 June 1976 [FBIS, 30 June 1976, pp. CC8–17]. the Romanian point of view on the Paris conference can be seen in “Solidaritatea si unitatea tuturor fortelor democratice, progresiste—imperativ fundamental al epoch’ contemproane,” Era Socialistǎ, 5 May 1980, pp. 1–3; cf. Pamfil Nichitelea, “Independenta nationals Si socialismului, un tot organic,” ibid., pp. 4–7. See also RFER, May 13 1980.

74. Carrillo was invited to Bucharest in August 1977 at a time when he was the subject of harsh attacks from the Communist party of the Soviet Union (RFER, 4–11 August 1977). He visited Bucharest again in August 1978 (Scînteia, 29 August 1978), in November 1979, for the Twelfth Party Congress (Bucharest D.S., 11 November 1979), and in April 1982 (Agerpress, 10 April 1982 [FBIS, 12 April 1982, p. H4]).

75. See Romania's, statement on the desirability of a “new international security order” in Lumea, 23–29 04 1982, pp. 14–15Google Scholar, and Lumea, 30 April–6 May 1982, pp. 8–9.

76. See, for example, Ceausescu's mildly favorable reaction to the Reagan “zero-option” proposals regarding European-based nuclear weapons (Scînteia, 22 November 1981, p. 1). Unlike its allies, Romania supported the Camp David peace framework (Scînteia, 22 September 1978) and the peace treaty that eventually emerged between Egypt and Israel (Scînteia, 15 March 1979).

77. Scînteia, 20 February 1979.

78. Scînteia, 3 January 1980, p. 1, and 4 January 1980, p. 4.

79. Radu, Michael, “Romania and the Third World: The Dilemmas of a ‘Free Rider‘,” in Radu, Michael, ed., Eastern Europe and the Third World (New York: Praeger, 1981), pp. 246–48Google Scholar.

80. Fischer, , “Nicolae Ceausescu and the Romanian Political Leadership,” p. 30Google Scholar.

81. Ceausescu's speech to the 1972 National Party Conference, in Romania on the Way of Building up the Multilaterally Developed Socialist Society, vol. 7, p. 505Google Scholar.

82. See Fischer-Galati, Stephen, The New Rumania (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1967), pp. 44–78Google Scholar.

83. On this point see Fischer, , “Nicolae Ceausescu and the Romanian Political Leadership,” p. 42Google Scholar. In the fall of 1981 disturbances were again reported in the Jiu Valley; reportedly, when Ceausescu tried to visit the area his helicopter was stoned (BBC, 13 November 1981; Financial Times, 17 November 1981).

84. For other discussions of possible opposition, see Nelson, Democratic Centralism, and Jowitt, “Political Innovation.”

85. Scînteia, 17 October 1980, p. 3; Scîntea, 22 September 1981 [FBIS, 24 September 1981, pp. H1–H3].

86. Scînteia, 5 November 1980, p. 6, and 26 December 1981, p. 6.

87. Bucharest Domestic Service, 26 September 1980 [FBIS, 30 September 1980, p. H6]; România Liberǎ, 18 October 1980, p. 3.

88. Christian Science Monitor, 10 February 1982, p. 9; Vjesnik (Zagreb), 2 11 1982Google ScholarPubMed; Financial Times, 7 June 1984; on quotas for private production, see Scînteia, 19 January 1984, pp. 2–3.

89. Reuters News Service, 3 November 1982; RFER, 12 November 1982.

90. Scînteia, 2 July 1983, pp. 1–2, and 7 September 1983, pp. 1, 5.